Slashdot Mirror
ABC Affiliates Grapple With TV-Show Downloads
Carl Bialik writes "By making an episode of 'Lost' available for download last week just half a day after it aired, for a $1.99 charge, 'Apple may have helped open a Pandora's box for the media business,' the Wall Street Journal reports. The president of the association representing ABC's affiliate stations sent a letter to the president of ABC, reading in part, 'It is both disappointing and unsettling that ABC would embark on a new -- and competitive -- network program distribution partnership without the fundamental courtesy of consultation' with its affiliates. While the extent of Apple's TV downloads is limited, the Journal parses the potential impact: 'if downloading episodes over the Internet proves popular, analysts believe Apple will get permission to offer shows with better-fidelity pictures. Any success Apple has won't go unnoticed by other online media powerhouses with expanding video initiatives like Yahoo Inc., Google Inc. and Microsoft Corp., which could all help extend TV downloading to more viewers.'"
Thank you Apple! Once again this company (along with ABC this time) has the stones to step up and offer a service that is a market primed to explode. The iTMS has proven to be a good long tail business model for the distribution of music, offering popular and otherwise out of print or hard to find (Indie) tracks that are simply unavailable in the large retail outlets. I have not watched much TV in the past while, but having the iTMS model of distribution for TV shows that are out of syndication or are otherwise hard to obtain would be a tremendous boon. And if Ted Turner would get on the ball, all sorts of older movies could also be made available via this model, that would increase revenues over what they are making by the current limited access to the media. Documentaries, "foreign" (to the US) films, and indie films could make it truly big by talking to Apple. Sundance Channel and TCM, you are the big guys in this market......So, are you paying attention? And for you TIVOheads out there, in essence, if this propagates to the rest of the industry, this will be a centralized TIVO allowing you to pick and choose without having to take the time to program, and like the article said, this could make the ala carte system moot. Who knows, this could even open up the option of letting us pay for content that is without commercials or get it for "free" if we agree to watch the commercials. It's could simply be our choice.
P.S., Ted, thanks for the buffalo ranching, but there is more money to be made still in media. Don't give up.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Sometimes I want to pull my hair out!
Exactly how is this bad for the affiliate stations? For a nano second I can't imagine this didn't help these affiliates. How much you wanna bet the viewership was up for the episode of Lost following the announcement of the video iPod? Peoples' normal reactions would be along the lines of:
I don't think any of the above are off-the-scale guesses of peoples' reactions and I think the viewership because of the video iPod could actually increase!
But, let's assume the death star, end-of-the-universe scenario the affiliates and others see this as. They see this as a threat rather than an extension. So, if it is true, boo-hoo!
Thank goodness the lobbyists and power brokers circling the wagons today for the hapless industry wasn't present in the late 19th and early 20th century to protect the horse and buggy industry in the same way... We'd have no cars today (since that would have threatened the established travel industry).
(So, for the record, does anyone know what the comparison was for Lost pre- vs. post-video iPod announcement? I don't really care, but it'd be interesting to know.)
"It is unsettling that ABC has chosen to act as an independent agent in a free market, rather than subjecting its decisions to cartel politics. ABC's rash action opens up an incredible Pandora's box; once we start provide the customers with what they want at prices they are willing to pay, who knows where THAT dangerous path might end?"
I could still just download it via bittorrent for free.....
We seldom regret saying too little but often regret saying too much.
Business models change over time. Companies can either attempt to adjust their business models to take advantage of those changes or try to fight those changes (RIAA). If the TV companies were smart and downloading shows of the internet proves to be the "wave of the future" they need to find a way to take advantage of that instead of trying to stop it.
. . . broadcast TV is dead. Or is this another Wolf-cry like VHS destroying the theater business or catalogs (or the internet) closing every mall in America?
Advertising, in my opinion, is a huge reason behind the controversy. The traditional distribution model allows media outlets to force consumers to have interrupted commercial sessions. With a single point of exit media outlets can statistically figure out how much viewership they have and set appropriate advertising rates. Now that ABC has broken the mold its causes much concern among affiliates on the future of advertising rates and whether they can still drive as much revenue. Of course I'm just speculating.
Most of national advertising rates fluctuate as they are based off of current Nielsen ratings which samples viewing habits year round. However local advertising rates are set for a yearly basis based off the TV audience during a specific period 4 times a year(Sweeps Week). With a smaller audience watching TV through this traditional method local affiliates lose a huge chunk of ad revenue.
They can stop crying and start getting ready for it. If they don't fill the demand, someone will. As soon as I can have a high speed internet connection without the help of either the local cable company or telephone company then I'll be free of both.
At that point, any content I can't get online, I simply will do without. Sell me entertainment online, or sell me nothing. It makes no difference to me. There's plenty of free and legal clips of amusement here and there at least as worthwhile as the junk they air on TV anyway.
Besides, I find reading books and doing technical reading online is a better use of my time than watching television in the first place.
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
You are correct for the moment, but once this catches on, people will realize it is a better, more enjoyable method of entertainment.
:D
Forget tivo. This is it.
As far as I'm concerned, the modern day affiliate station is a simple load-balancing device.
The funeral for tivo will be held tomorrow evening, 2100 hours, at 1, infinity loop, Cupertino, CA.
Affiliate stations: BE AFRAID
it's incredable these people haven't be investigated for anti competitive behaviour yet.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
What was ABC thinking, doing something as offensive and inexcusable as making content available to consumers in a more convenient yet still-lucrative form? Absolutely unforgivable!
Really, this seems like a very self-regulating situation. If consumers enjoy and respond to this offering, then both content producers and consumers have a great new option, and neither one of them owes previous distribution channels a damn thing. If people don't care for the new format, then existing distribution channels continue to maintain their position and profits.
Obviously this has a strong chance of being a bad deal for advertising-driven distribution in the long term. But even if it is, the notion that content producers had any obligation to avoid it out of mere politeness is absurd.
I wonder when we'll see FedEx and UPS complaining that offering software for download--rather than shipping CDs--was a very rude thing for the software industry to begin doing without so much as a by-your-leave.
People love Tivos. But if you look at why, it's simply because it takes a broadcast show and turns it into real digital media that you can do the normal things digital media allows, like scnaning or random access.
It makes no sense any longer for people to do ANYTHING but download shows and access the contents as they please, when they please. That's what Apple is opening up to the mass market for current TV, and what people will most naturally except. Fighting this migration is a loosing battle.
I really feel like as cool as Tivo is, it's trapped between a rock and a hard place. The rock are media companies that are unsure about people being able to record anything. The hard place is when people discover they like random media so much, they'd rather just download everything and use it that way. Apple is taking over the space Tivo could have if they'd started looking at a downloadable TV market.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
When I originally read about this, I wondered what the quality would be like. A brief googling suggests that the files are about 150-200MB, which seems like the quality should be better than I was expecting.
Does anyone have any first hand experience with the downloaded episodes? How is the quality on a pc or tv screen?
It looks like slowly but surely, we are getting to see the future of entertainment in this country... no more being forced to sit through annoying commercials, but just being able to watch what we really want... It would be worth it to me, to pay a small price each month, to not have to see commercials ever, and just watch the content only... Not to mention, if we could just click and choose what we wanted to watch, that would be far better, then being stuck with the static content we have now... Imagine the possibilities... I can not wait :)
Need a Nerd?
Nerd Systems
With enough money paid to the right powerful people, big rich corporations like ClearChannel will pay someone to solve the issue of closing this supposedly "uncloseable" Pandora's box.
Yes, Thank you Apple! Finnally someone has done what the consumers have been screaming for for years! So many nay-sayers look at the iPod Video and say it is some gimmick, but what they dont realise is exactly this pandoras box being opened!
The day when I can download my latest episodes of SG1 or my girlfriends O.C for $1.99 rather than wait 6-9months for it to come on TV in the UK is the day that I stop using eMule!
Thank you Apple you found the only way to stop priacy.
The resolution is not that high but the bitrate is pretty good... I would say it looks better than VHS, perhaps not quite as good as a digital satellite connection airing the original. I bought the first episode of Lost just to try it out (and see if I really want to buy the DVD set), and it's more than watchable to me.
I really look forward to when they start offering pay-per-download HDTV shows.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Network affiliates are the roadkill of the information superhighway.
Once broadband reaches 25mbps there is no reason for a separate tv connection.
The tv networks will become what UPN has already a dumping ground for
tv viewers who are Old and poor.
The networks however have a saving grace, they can still outcompete
itunes. People will happily accept commercials in their tv programs
if they get the programs for FREE...history has already proven this.
There is no technical reason people cant simply download their favorite
programs and watch them with commericals for free or commerical free
for an additional fee.
This would actually free up networks ro produce programs audiences wanted
instead of programs affiliates wanted...programs that could be targeted
to niche audiences rather than lowest common denominator.
"Lost?" Come on. I don't even watch that stuff on TV let alone waste bits from my broadband connection to download it...
Produce something worth watching and I'll go back to watching TV.
Lobbyists are not a new invention. It appears the term was coined in the early 19th century. It's a shame really. If they were a recent invention, someone would have patented the business method and then we would at least be free of them for about 20 years ;-)
That particular episode of Lost is irrelevant in the big picture. The issue is whether the network is going to undercut its affiliates by building an alternate distribution model.
dude, you've just been dumped for somebody hotter.
FLAC - Free Lossless Audio Codec
Networks are freaking out over this because it has the possibility of messing with the status-quo.
The business model is that shows are only available as a television broadcast or DVD purchase. Sure, you have Tivo, but that's still television.
Now, you're taking the content of television and putting it onto a new medium: the digital medium. Networks are going to throw up rad flags, thinking "WE'RE GOING TO LOSE MONEY! FUCK!"
Then again, digital content is a hot-topic issue (see: illegal use of P2P apps). This is a natural extension of that paranoia.
Here's a wacky idea, rather than just rebroadcasting network crap, why don't local affiliates actually produce quality programming of their own that they could sell on the iTunes video service. Believe it or not they used to do this sort of thing back in the day. Oh wait, that would require them to work, which is much harder than sitting on your ass and making a lot of money by squatting on publicly owned airwaves.
cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
Quote: If downloading episodes over the Internet proves popular...
Uh, what do they mean if? It's already exceedingly popular on BitTorrent and the like, just not sanctioned by the media companies until now (OK, the BBC is doing it but not many others). The genie is already out of this bottle and yet another industry wants to bury it's head in the sand. They have to realize that people, including myself, are willing to pay money to see shows we've missed or cannot get in our area. Where's a capitalist when you need one? Steve Jobs yet again has pulled off a marvelous coup and now the affliates, Hollywood, SAG and anyone else who didn't have the forsight to start this on there own want a piece.
Because for many consumers it is simply too hard to set up the computer to record the show, edit out the commercials, compress it in a suitable format and copy it across to the player. Then there is even a subset of geeks like me that can easily do it but just couldn't be bothered.
It's TV after all; a bit of entertainment after a hard day at work. I just want to watch the show, not muck around with recordings, having to preview it by editing out commercials first etc. For $2 - I'll pay that!
With the same logic, why spend up to $5 at Starbucks to buy a coffee when I could just buy some beans, grind them myself, brew, froth the milk, and serve for next to nothing?
There will always be smart people like yourself willing to go the extra mile to save a buck, but the majority simply don't care.
The affiliates should be scared, because today's TV mechanism is silly and out of date. The very idea of a "channel" is meaningless. And the advertisers are paying approx. $1/per hour to the stations for my time. $1 per hour! At that rate I will gladly outbid the advertisers to reclaim my time. And unlike bittorrent and unrestricted PVR's, legal downloads probably won't have the law working against them. Be afraid, affiliates, be very afraid.
I dont see how your reasoning holds for the long run. Yes they probably got a boost from the extra press, but in the long run that's not going to keep happening. That's not to say it couldnt help the networks. But the help will come from new viewers who download a few episodes then decide that they like it well enough to watch it with better quality a day earlier than it's available online.
You characterized the affiliates as whiners but you have to remember that they've signed long term contracts with ABC to distribute it's media at a time when they were the only game in town. Now ABC blindsided them with this new competition. Companies are inevitably going to be hurt by shifts in distribution models but I think it's reasonable for ABC to at least give the affiliates a heads up. That's the price you pay for a Steve Jobs style launch I guess.
--aiee
This is slightly more technical, but I've been wondering about if they are going to offer up a torrent style iTunes client. This could be a tremendeous boon for for instance podcasts, and video podcasts in general. Maybe only for free content but still.
Sure, many wouldn't be able to figure out how to open up their firewall, but enough people would, that it would make a tremendous difference for some poor podcaster. It will likely let them cut their provider bill in half. Or they could reach 10 times as many people for the same cost. They could even make sure that all their friends have seeds before they release the podcast, that way they don't even really need a server provider (not of the type where you need to know how many GB per month you are allowed).
This would also be a tremendous benefit for Apple since being on iTunes definitely would be the shiznat for all the podcasters because now it also has a very direct benefit for them.
Also, if they did the torrent thing then they would get some serious Google type respect from geeks. Apple would be credited for making decentralized file sharing mainstream.
I can't even think of a down side. Can someone slap me out of this?
The Internet is full. Go Away!!!
Allow me to be the first one to say (this minute at least): I sure as hell hope for the TV serie industry their downloadable material is at least better than the pirated versions. As a fan of Lost living in a country where Season 2 doesn't air, I have practically three choices:
* I wait an hour after the US airing and download a generic 350 MB HDTV-rip of the show. DVD quality. No ads.
* I wait two hours after the US airing and download the much better 700 MB HR HDTV-rip with surround sound. Better than DVD-quality. No ads.
* I log onto my non-existing iTunes account on an iTunes-network I am not allowed on and for $2 dollars download.. What exacly? Some kind of quicktime version?
Oh well, they will probably never try and do it right, because then they can't say this new distribution system didn't work.
The record labels are horrible beasts, but at least we know where we stand with them-- they own a song outright and have ultimate say as to what can be done and what the price should be. Television shows, on the other hand, are based on many complicated deals that extend far into the the future-- and they have to be, because there are a lot of people (and companies) involved in a production who all want their share of potential revenue. It's not all about the first run ad dollars.
"Lost" and "Desperate Housewives" are Touchstone productions, so Disney has a lot more control over their distribution. That's not always or even often the case-- many times a network works with a separate production company, and if it's an older show someone else may have the rights to syndication. Which basically means the contracts for many programs, especially those "in the vault", are going to have to be renegotiated before a network can make them available for download, and some won't be available at all. It also means $2 downloads may not end up being the standard.
I wouldn't be surprised if the guilds got involved, too. Actors, writers, and directors are due royalties from syndication and DVD compilations. Are they going to get a cut of that $2? Their contracts most likely specified terms for residuals from reruns, but what's their cut of an iTunes download? This will be addressed in every contract from today forward, but what about the ones in place now (and the ones from a decade ago?)
On the bright side, what I've noticed on Apple's marketing is that they keep slipping in references to "video podcasts"-- which at the moment barely exist. This could mean iTunes could branch into a new distribution channel for indie programs, like how Netflix is having some success as the sole distributor of certain movies.) It could be both the "bush leagues" for aspiring shows, or the place where shows with a fan base but who can't get the numbers to stay on the air (like Futurama or Freaks and Geeks) could end up.
The problem is ad revenue. Advertisers pay ABC to produce the show and ABC affiliates receive funding during such programming because more eyes are watching it. If popular programmes are being downloaded from the Internet, this may not hurt ABC per se, but this certainly cuts into affiliate revenues.
You have to remember, there are many people making money on the current television distribution system, from the people who make the programs to the guys who carry the video to the broadcast booth, all the way down to the local TV stations that get syndication revenues (which is why old popular TV shows are not already available for download).
As usual, the answer to the question is 'follow the money'.
1) Lead
2) Follow
3) Get the hell out of the way
I just find it funny that it costs at least 0.99 USD to purchase a three-and-a-half minute song, but only 1.99 USD to download an episode of a TV show, which has cast and crew to pay, filming, sets, etc. Combine this with the fact that the RIAA wants even more money for a single track...pretty amazing.
I suppose compared to purchasing a box set of a show that may cost up to 60 USD, at least TV episode downloading seems to offer some sort of significant price break from purchasing the actual high-quality non-DRM'd media from a store (new or used), and provides the a la carte option. The only question that I have regarding the a la carte option for TV shows is, wouldn't there be a much greater demand to own an entire season of a show than there would be to own an entire CD? After all, on a CD it's not as if Track 11 of an album doesn't make sense if you didn't listen to Track 9 or 10.
Cable costs 60 to 100 per month. Channels I'd like to watch out of 120 end up hovering at around 3.
Where in the world are you buying your cable TV from? Or is this one of those classic Slashdot price exaggerations like "CD's cost $20" when they really cost $12 from any large retailer? (Even the grossly overpriced music stores in the mall charge $18 or so for a CD)
I've never seen basic cable cost over $40 per month, and digital satellite companies have plans starting at $30 per month. I'm all for "sticking it to the man", but exaggerating prices at every opportunity doesn't make us sound like a reasonable group.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
What's happening here is that the affiliates are seeing the writing on the wall. Downloads of shows aren't going to make a dent for a while but they could. If a significant amount of the viewership starts watching their TV shows via Apple's downloads then that is that many less people watching it on the air and seeing ads. TV stations know this as do the advertisers. Advertisers will not be willing to pay as much for those ad slots because there's less on-air viewership for that show at that time on that station.
The networks are going to make money either way as they are playing both ends against the middle. They make money from the affiliate licenses as well as from downloads from Apple. TV stations are just going to have to cope. This isn't going to go away. They'll have to find another way to keep their local viewership up.
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
what do you do to allow people to discover new programs? I think many popular shows start off in bad time slots and are either upgraded or dropped but are given a chanse. I know many shows I loved I stumbled on and would not do so at $2 a pop. Do execs offer some new shows for free until the catch on and then tack on the extra cost onto future episodes? As there is no garuntee of advertising time sales for the inital run of some new shows, which get some viewers out of the novelty, will we see less risks being taken with the 12th season of what sells today or would a show like Firefly be more popular as its profitability could be directly estimated (all the /. Nielson families please stand up)?
Today is a gift. Save the receipt.
I've never seen basic cable cost over $40 per month, and digital satellite companies have plans starting at $30 per month. I'm all for "sticking it to the man", but exaggerating prices at every opportunity doesn't make us sound like a reasonable group.
His pricing is right on with what I pay. I signed up for $50 a month basic cable that became $60 a month after taxes. Add to that $15 for a digital box so I can get On Demand, toss in the broadband, and it's $100.00 a month. It would be $15 less if I didn't have digital, but if I want HBO or any similar channel it's another $15.
Not complaining - no one forced me to get cable. But the pricing he quoted is consistent with what I pay for Comcast.
The Luddites were ahead of their time.
Yeah, the way Apple has exploited their dominance of the OS market to take over the downloadable music market and the MP3 market is pretty heinous and I'm sure the DOJ is keeping a close eye on them. And the creation of a new market of downloading video clips! That's just the sort of unfair business practice to which the DOJ pays close attention. Reminds me exactly of how MS has bullied PC makers to maintain its monopoly.
Er, wait.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
...you're going to tell me how Apple is going to cram a 35 inch screen inside your iPod case.
OK, so you can take your episode of Lost with you, and watch it on your pocket TV. Pocket TVs have been around for...what, more than a decade? How many people do you know stopped buying 25, 32, 50 inch TVs for their house, and multi-thousand dollar sound systems to plug those TVs into, because, well golly gee, now they can put their TV in their pocket.
iPod TV downloads and TiVo solve different problems related to TV viewing. The new iPod service lets you take portable TV shows with you. TiVo lets you time shift, search and archive, and if you have the personal motivation to set up TivoToGo and upgrade your PocketPC handheld with the right WMP software, take portable TV shows with you.
So really, the only thing the new iPod/ABC service does is remove the requirement that your TiVo be available at the time the show comes on the TV. Of course, it's not like you actually have to do anything to make your TiVo record...just set up the season pass, and they'll be there, assuming the show aired in the first place.
All the iPod/ABC service does is remove the requirement for the show to have aired at its original time. And it still has the shortcoming of only being watchable on a screen that, at it's best, is less than a quarter the size of the smallest laptop I've used in the last 5 years.
I wouldn't start the funeral dirge for PVRs and PVR services yet. Not unless that's a TV in your pocket, and not just that you're happy to see me.
This space for rent. Call 1-800-STEAK4U
I certianly wouldn't want to buy any of these right now, sure the bit rate is good for the iPod video, or even a computer screen, but blowing them up on a TV must suck!
Most TV's have worse resolution than the average monitor. These are acceptable, but not great for either.
Combine that with the fact that an average season (22-24 episodes) would cost $43.78 - $47.76 and I would much rather spend that money buying something that can be displayed on my TV!
Full seasons cost less than the price of all their episodes, just as full albums cost less than the price of all their songs. These episodes do end up undercutting DVDs, but not by a lot. The strength of this offering is in the instant gratification, easier portability, and granularity. Just as many people want to buy just that one song they like from an album, many people also want to buy just that one episode they missed or a TV show.
I assume the DRM is FairPlay
So they say, although seeing as FairPlay is an Apple trademark term, FairPlay could be something different for video than audio. I expect it will be the same or very similar and hopefully, locked down to the same degree,
May they be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.
While I seriously doubt that we will ever completly be rid of TV with commercials, I do suspect that at some point, that the TV viewing audience will be limited to the following:
1) Viewing Live Events
2) Viewing low quality shows
3) Those destitute enough to not afford to download favorite shows.
If viewers can pay to download a TV show they want to see, and keep it as long as they want, it will lead to several consequences. The first is that as noted in the article, the downloaded version of the show may be available in a higher definition. The second is that since its not broadcast, you wont have to worry about the FCC censoring naughty words or naughty images. The third is that the shows will no longer be forced to allow commercial breaks, and can run longer or shorter as needed by the story of that episode.
This in turn could create the possibility that the version of the show that gets broadcast will be the inferior version of the show. And if your a true fan of the show, why settle for the crappy version?
On top of that, once yoru no longer beholden to the schedule of the broadcaster, why be limted to watching only what they want to show you? If your a hard core sci-fi fan, why waste time with sitcoms? You could just download shows like every episode Star Trek, Battle Star Galactica, X-Files, Babylon 5, Firefly, and whatever else you actually want to watch. I am sure that the content providers will have no objections to selling to you from their back catalog.
When (not if) downloading a selected version of a TV show becomes viable choice, TV Advertisers will be largely screwed.
Welcome to the Revolution!
END COMMUNICATION
You mean like the rest of us got used to the idea of having our jobs outsourced to east Crapistan? I don't remember any consultation for that, do you guys?
So what's stopping you from forming a local group and developing your own content? Maybe that idea would occur to you if you weren't so busy whining about the world moving on.
This is what capitalism is all about. New technolgies arise and induce change. The market adapts and either business adapts or goes the way of RCA. You can either keep whining to the parent network, hoping they'll throw you a bone to get you to shut up. Or you can start understanding the new environment and content creation and get off your big, fat rolling in cash TV ass and learn to operate in the new reality.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
Desperate Housewives commands $350,000 for a 30 second spot. There are 17 minutes of commercials in 1 episode, which means there are 34 commercials in each episode.
That comes to $11.9 million per episode. That means 6 million people need to purchase each episode in order to match what ABC currently gets from advertisers.
Somehow I think the people talking about the death of broadcast TV are a bit pre-mature.
"incredibly disproportionate" in what regard? Is the music too expensive or is the show?!
Music is generally pretty cheap to make. Nowadays you don't need expensive studios or musicians, nearly everything is done with pro-track. And let's face it; the artists rarely ever get paid unless they can stretch a career out for several years. That's why I think a dollar is too much. I'd probably pay 10 cents a song if it was in a lossless format.
However, TVs shows have executive producers, producers, directors, gaffers, camera people, HIGHLY paid actors, writers, etc. All who are unionized and all who get paid a damn lot. Hit shows are incredibly expensive to make. Even a successful shows like Friends never made a profit in primetime, NBC will make its profit in reruns and DVD sales. Considering all that I consider two bucks a barging, but not at the ridiculously low resolution Apple is selling them for.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
The complaint didn't come from an ABC competitor, it came from an ABC affiliate. As in, one of the local stations that takes a part of the pie generated by the public's eyeballs. What ABC has done is completely circumvented its own affiliates without even so much as a heads up, which is quite a rude thing to do to your distribution channel. If iTunes TV distribution takes viewers away from the affiliates, Apple will win at their expense.
This is a far more subtle relationship than your "business models change, you have to adapt or die" dismissal warrants.
For those of you who don't want to read the original text of the letter, we now present the abridged version below:
Affiliates: Wah!
This has been a special presentation. We now return you to your busy work schedule.
This crap better be commercial free or I am gonna scream. I don't give a rats ass about the economics of advertising dollars paying for the free broadcasting of television shows. I want my shit commercial free. It is bad enough that my TiVo finger is worn out because of all the fast forwarding I do...
..you're going to tell me how Apple is going to cram a 35 inch screen inside your iPod case.
That's where the Mac MINI with proper home theater output comes into play. I don't like portable video either but would love a mac HTPC. You can already use the mini in just such a way but it's more cumbersome and involves external adaptors.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It is character driven with outstanding production values and quality acting.
Now if only they'd put some of that effort into the technical writing.
Remember Sayid's attempt to triangulate the French woman's broadcast from season 1, by placing antennas at various points around the island and turning them on all at once, even though there was only one radio and it wasn't connected to any of them? Or how about when he walked around looking for cellphone-style "bars" on his walkie talkie so he could transmit a distress call? Or when he couldn't transmit because there was a powerful signal on a different frequency? Simply ridiculous.
People have been speculating about the machines in the hatch.. you know, "That computer looks like [system XYZ] but the Execute key only appeared on [system PQRS], so this must be a special lab if it has that kind of custom equipment!" I can't help but laugh, because the writers obviously don't care about making any of the technology realistic.
Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
"Why, what Apple is doing is being done today! Anyone who has cable - well that is digital cable - well that is digital cable with VOD - can do the same thing today. Although if they want to keep it I guess they have to figure out how to hook up a compute rto the cable box."
Apple has never been about doing things that are totally new. They just take things people would like to do and make them inviting for everyone to actually partake of.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Apple will delay releasing new episodes until one week after they're broadcast. Therefore, people will flock to the affiliates to see it a week earlier. Sounds like a win.